AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 ans 9 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 43% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 35 Watt versus 50 Watt
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1894 versus 1713
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 355 versus 333
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 26.039 versus 12.449
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.666 versus 1.295
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.603 versus 24.566
- 4.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 135.437 versus 28.025
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 23 April 2018 versus 25 June 2013 |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt versus 50 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1894 versus 1713 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 355 versus 333 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.039 versus 12.449 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.666 versus 1.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.603 versus 24.566 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 135.437 versus 28.025 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 versus 3344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 versus 3344 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
- 3.3x plus de vitesse du noyau: 980 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 455.796 versus 176.928
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3093 versus 2408
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3504 versus 3170
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3093 versus 2408
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3504 versus 3170
- 2.5x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2148 versus 862
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 980 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 455.796 versus 176.928 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3093 versus 2408 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3504 versus 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3093 versus 2408 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3504 versus 3170 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2148 versus 862 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1894 | 1713 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 355 | 333 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.039 | 12.449 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 176.928 | 455.796 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.666 | 1.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.603 | 24.566 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 135.437 | 28.025 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2408 | 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 | 3504 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2408 | 3093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 | 3504 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3344 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 862 | 2148 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4928 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Raven | GK107 |
| Date de sortie | 23 April 2018 | 25 June 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 931 | 934 |
| Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4,940 million | 1,270 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 752.6 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 384 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 31.36 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | Up to 3840x2160 | |
| Soutien du signal sDP 1.2 | Up to 3840x2160 | |
| Protection du contenu HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Support du signale LVDS | Up to 1920x1200 | |
| Bitstreaming d’audio TrueHD et DTS-HD | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0 | |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 86.4 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5400 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
| Configuration standard de la mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
| Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Direct Compute | ||
| FXAA | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient avec des autres
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5300
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 675M
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 670M
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 755M
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
AMDRadeon R7 M370
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Embedded
